By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - The Japanese Market is collapsing

fkusumot on 17 March 2008
phil said:
Kasz216 said:
 

The cold war cost Russia a lot. The country would of eventually collapsed anyway... Communism can't work outside of a vacuum, but it would of took longer.


Absolute nonsense. Maybe PURE communism won't work in reality, but if they hadn't had Brezhnev for almost 20 years or if Andropov hadn't died, the Soviets may well have still been around today. Given incompetent enough leaders, any political system will collapse.


 What Kasz216 said is not absolute nonsense. It's was one of the major issues of practical political science as it related to the ideal socialistic state. It's been an issue since Das Kapital was written. Are you being purposefully ignorant of the history of political science or are you just being obtuse?



I Blame Wii Fit!

Around the Network
totalwar23 on 17 March 2008
phil said:
Kasz216 said:
 

The cold war cost Russia a lot. The country would of eventually collapsed anyway... Communism can't work outside of a vacuum, but it would of took longer.


Absolute nonsense. Maybe PURE communism won't work in reality, but if they hadn't had Brezhnev for almost 20 years or if Andropov hadn't died, the Soviets may well have still been around today. Given incompetent enough leaders, any political system will collapse.

That only applies if the ruling party can't be removed from power. How is a democracy going to collapse? We have the choice to kick out party every several years.

 



Kasz216 on 17 March 2008
totalwar23 said:
phil said:
Kasz216 said:
 

The cold war cost Russia a lot. The country would of eventually collapsed anyway... Communism can't work outside of a vacuum, but it would of took longer.


Absolute nonsense. Maybe PURE communism won't work in reality, but if they hadn't had Brezhnev for almost 20 years or if Andropov hadn't died, the Soviets may well have still been around today. Given incompetent enough leaders, any political system will collapse.

That only applies if the ruling party can't be removed from power. How is a democracy going to collapse? We have the choice to kick out party every several years.

 

How about both partys sucking and spending like drunken sailors?

Also there is the problem of people starting to vote for what they want, and not what they need.

Also intellegence runs on a bell curve... which can lead to problems when it comes to very complex issues.



phil on 17 March 2008
fkusumot said:
 

What Kasz216 said is not absolute nonsense. It's was one of the major issues of practical political science as it related to the ideal socialistic state. It's been an issue since Das Kapital was written. Are you being purposefully ignorant of the history of political science or are you just being obtuse?


No.  He said a real life practical non pure communist state couldn't possibly work, because a theoretical pure communist state can't possibly work.  I'm not the one being obtuse.  Here's my point: the idea that the fall of the Soviet Union was, or that the fall of any communist nation is inevitable is absurd.

kazadoom on 17 March 2008
Kasz216 said:
kazadoom said:
Can anyone explain why Bush gets the blame for the war when the congress approved it including democrats, and why is the economy his and republican's fault when the congress has been in the hands of the democrats for the last 3 years? Seriously you guys should all be up on capital hill making decisions for the country because you all know everything it seems. This is too amusing to read


Because the evidence seems to suggest he looked through a number of intellegence reports and picked the only one that suggested Iraq had weapons of mass destruction vs a bunch that suggested he didn't and treated that one report as fact?

Basically he knowingly mislead everyone, or unknowingly did so letting his bias greatly get in the way of his judgement skills. 

So all the democrats that believed the same evidence just all took his word on it.  Give me a break, it is the congress' job to look into stuff just like it is the president's.  Plus, if you think that there were no weapons, then you are crazy.  Sadam was just some innocent man sitting over there running a clean country with nothing going on behind the scenes.  Oh how naive you must be.

 



My Tag: 2 Timothy 3:1

Jesus Christ is the ONLY way to Heaven! (John14:6)

Every second 2 people die . . . What if this is your second? 

www.goodpersontest.com

Around the Network
phil on 17 March 2008
totalwar23 said:
 
That only applies if the ruling party can't be removed from power. How is a democracy going to collapse? We have the choice to kick out party every several years.

 


Iraq says hello.

phil on 17 March 2008
kazadoom said:
 
So all the democrats that believed the same evidence just all took his word on it. Give me a break, it is the congress' job to look into stuff just like it is the president's. Plus, if you think that there were no weapons, then you are crazy. Sadam was just some innocent man sitting over there running a clean country with nothing going on behind the scenes. Oh how naive you must be.

 


 You are now burdened with the responsibility of proving that there actually were WMD in Iraq or looking like a total jackass.  Congrats.

My money is on jackass, btw.



Lord N on 17 March 2008
Kasz216 said:
gorgepir said:
Kasz216 said:
gorgepir said:
Kasz216 said:
gorgepir said:
Are you telling me that the United states pays more for the military industry that it gains? Do you mean that the net income is negative?

For the Military sector? Well yeah.


Notice the wording, miltary industry not sector. I didn't ask about the maintanence and recruiting ... .


I don't understand why you are makign a wording difference, the cold war forced Russia to further recruit and maintain more weapons.

Had the cold war not be restarted it's likely Russia would of just suffered a fate like cuba, where brain drain is a big problem.

Why stay here making scale when you can leave the country and make more? That's why Communism had to be a world wide revolution.


Repeating a sentence does not make it correct. If it was correct, it would have been the first time you said it.


I'm not sure what your trying to ask? Russia like the US lost a lot more money when Reagan restarted the Cold War due to the fact that they had to produce and maintain a higher army, while also selling weapons, often yes at a loss.

Were they selling most of their weapons at a loss? Can't say, I don't have detailed financials... I do know their military polcies as a whole when reagan restarted the cold war did in fact cost them way more then they gained on anything they sold for a profit.

That's one of the reasons why Reagan started the War... because the russian system was already hitting a lot of problems staying even so by putting more pressure on them to keep up their country it drove their economic problems into high gear.

The USR's Military took up a lot of their budget no doubt, that and gas prices lowering are mostly what did them in. Gas being one of their main sources on income.

Well that and corrupt government officials.

Lot of paralels here. Gas prices up instead of down, but we buy oil, don't sell it. Close to zero economic growth, large military budget due to a "war". Though this time on terrorists, corrupt political officials.

The cold war cost Russia a lot. The country would of eventually collapsed anyway... Communism can't work outside of a vacuum, but it would of took longer.

This is a common misconception.

Soviet military spending did not increase at all during the Reagan era, and the Soviet Union would have collapsed just the same without it.

On another note, it's true that the president has no control over the ups and downs of the business cycle, but there are things that he can do to mitigate economic downturn and set the way for recovery, and Bush has failed miserably in that regard. It certainly doesn't help that he decided to piss away the surplus on tax cuts for the rich, drag the US into a needless and counterproductive war which has cost hundreds of billions of dollars, or fund arcane and ridiculous projects with deficit spending instead of focusing money on areas where it would have helped the economy.

 



 

Consoles owned: Saturn, Dreamcast, PS1, PS2, PSP, DS, PS3

totalwar23 on 17 March 2008
Kasz216 said:
totalwar23 said:
phil said:
Kasz216 said:
 

The cold war cost Russia a lot. The country would of eventually collapsed anyway... Communism can't work outside of a vacuum, but it would of took longer.


Absolute nonsense. Maybe PURE communism won't work in reality, but if they hadn't had Brezhnev for almost 20 years or if Andropov hadn't died, the Soviets may well have still been around today. Given incompetent enough leaders, any political system will collapse.

That only applies if the ruling party can't be removed from power. How is a democracy going to collapse? We have the choice to kick out party every several years.

 

How about both partys sucking and spending like drunken sailors?

Also there is the problem of people starting to vote for what they want, and not what they need.

Also intellegence runs on a bell curve... which can lead to problems when it comes to very complex issues.


 Look, we all know in the US, parties will change their position and competency over time due to the influx of new members and history changing events. Unless something extremely terrible happens which forces desperation, I hardly think people will choose a authorian political system (who makes false or radical promises to gain popular support) over a free one. Short of being invaded, not all political systems collapse from incompetent leadership. 



totalwar23 on 17 March 2008
phil said:
totalwar23 said:
 
That only applies if the ruling party can't be removed from power. How is a democracy going to collapse? We have the choice to kick out party every several years.

 


Iraq says hello.

 Umm, when did democracy collapse there? And it wouldn't be due to incompetent leadership, more like ethnic turmoil. And Iraq is not exactly a natural democracy, a forced one thanks to Bush.